NOV: Nederlandse Othello Vereniging

March 11, the sixth open Dutch Othello tournament. The third Sunday in which Marijne en I head towards Amstelveen. Playing Othello is fun, but the early awakening and journey to a place 500 meters away from my regular work reminds me too much of a regular working day. Enough ranting, back to the tournament. It was well visited, yet even more competitors (36) then the previous one. There were plenty of strong opponents to promise a good day. And a good day it turned out to be, I lost two games, but I could have done worse considering the fact that I lost to David Shaman and Alexander Cordy. Yet failure teaches success if one is willing to examine the mistakes he has made, hence the analysis of both games. These are my first analyses so if people find mistakes, or see other opportunities please mail them to me (michiel.le.comte@zonnet.nl) or leave a message on the guestbook.

Anyway, back to the first game vs. David Shaman. Here is how it went: A first impression of how I saw the game: The first six moves standard perpendicular, and move 7 was new to me (the opening turned out to be a standard one called Shaman/Danish…). I tried to follow the opening as well as I could but had no opening book knowledge to draw upon. It turned out that my moves weren’t always first choice but not too bad at all. The midgame unfolded in a pretty standard way; I had 3 moves that I doubted but my position didn’t look bad near the end. I did make one big mistake in the end game however, which turned the odds. Reviewing the game with David, we came to the conclusion that my move h1 should have been g1. Wzebra pointed out that my fatal mistake was made one move earlier though. G1 turned out to be correct but the damage was already done :( Too bad that I gave a winning position away at such a stage in the game, but I wasn’t disappointed with losing 34-30 to David Shaman.

A detailed analysis: moves 1 to 7 were standard book moves. I chose c2 as response to d3, where c3 is a more standard option. David’s response e2 opened more options for me, other choices were a3 or c3, keeping my options less closed. E6 presented itself as a nice quiet move, which I took, since it also opened b5. F6, b5 followed normally, after which d2 was played. I think b6 or f2 would have been more appropriate, forcing me to open up more. I missed the option of c3 (or second choice c7) myself immediately after that though, evening the odds instead of exploiting options. Perhaps I should start eating sugar or kiwis too :) C3 now is a move that really can’t be ignored any longer and David took it. I followed with b3, preferring to stay away from the edge just a tad longer instead of playing c1, since both moves would create a nice move b6. A6 next, poisoning b6. Oh well, to the edge then, playing c1. D1, b6 followed, and then black missed the options g5 and g6. David played B1 instead, sacrificing a1 basically. F1 is my only option at this moment, since opening the frontier c6-f6 would definitely not be a good idea. A3, e7, a5, a4 follow in a standard way, forcing black to open up, or continue to put pressure on the a1 corner. David chose for the first option, by playing c7. Since this leads to c7, g6, f8, d8, black is forced to break white’s frontier. If black had opted for b2 instead of c7, the a1 sacrifice would have resulted in gaining more tempo since b2 removes access to e1. A typical sequence would be b2, f6, e1, a1, a2, f2, c7, c8, d8 and black would be able to gain control of a8 and move from there on. What happened was c7, g6, f8, d8 and now sacrificing a1 isn’t that profitable any more. David chose to open with g5, other options were f2 or g4, where I would have preferred g4 myself. The following sequence d7, e8, c8, f7 was pretty basic, and I played g3, although tempo gaining by f2 or e1 was a better idea. B2 was a good move, and I made a bad one with g8. This opened a nice wedge edge to the south for David once I had taken a1 and a8. Better would have been to remain at the west side with either h4 or h5. But not all was lost yet :) We’re in perfect play region now (at least for a good computer) so I will denote the difference in disks behind moves, to indicate how well we played in the end. For example, I played h5, leading to +6 instead of h4 leading to +10 so h5 is denoted as h5 (-4). Here it is: h6, h5 (-4), e1 (-2), a1, a2, b7 (-2), h4, g4 (-2), h7, a7, h3. At this point I still was at a +4 position, although I had already given away 6 disks of advantage. My final error in this situation was to play f2. Black’s response g2 was correct and it simply gained too many disks. I should have opted for a7, sacrificing a8. This would lead to a7, a8, g7, h3, b8, h8, h1, g2, f2, f1 or a7, h3, g7, etc. In both cases, g7 would be a decisive tempo gaining move since I already controlled that diagonal! F2 was a –8 move, turning the tables. David and I discussed my next move h1 instead of g1, but both lead to 34-30 (as would h2). Anyway, h1, a8, h2, g1, h8, g7, --, b8 was perfect play. A good game, revealing that I have to practice my endgame more, or just to be a tad more patient :)

Two games later, I had to face Alexander Cordy. Another strong opponent and another good game. This time, I was fortunate to see an opening appear which I knew slightly better. The Rose-birdie/ Rose – Tamenori, as Wzebra calls it. Here is the actual game: Until move 17, we were on standard ground, where Alexander opted for d7 instead of h4 at move 18. My choice of c7 wasn’t great, either c8 or f2 would have opened less for Alexander. E7, f2, c6, e1, h5, d8, d2, g3, is a regular sequence, not the best one possible perhaps, but neither of us made large mistakes. Alexander played e8 at this stage, possible to block f8 for me, but either h4 or a5 would have been nicer. H4 for example would have blocked the c1 move I made next. Now this is a bad one by the way. I do not know how I have missed f8 at this stage.

This shows the importance of timing your moves, since I played f8 after white’s response h4, but now the move is much worse. (White has turned g4…) Instead of gaining tempo at the south side (f8, f7, etc.) or letting white gain an unbalanced edge at the south side (f8, c8), my move c1 made us fill the south side up evenly in the sequence c1, h4, f8, f7, g8, c8, b8. The next moves h3, b3, b5, a5, a4, and c2 lead to a +4 position for white. Again I will denote how our moves are with respect to perfect play. B2 (-2), a6 (-4), f1 (-10)!!!, g1 (-2). Notice that the position is +2 for me at this stage. I should have played h6 much earlier then I eventually did, this move would have lead to either another unbalanced edge for white or tempo gaining. Anyway, f1 was a bad move, either g7 or a7 would have lead to better positions, but I admit that sacrificing yet another corner does not look appealing to me either. Let’s continue: a7 (-2), a1, b1, a2 (-8)!!! And the tables have turned again g2 would have been much better, leading to d1, b7 and control of the a8-h1 diagonal… But no, that would have been too easy :) The game continued with a3, g7, h8, a8, b7, h7, h6, g2, d1, --, h1 and h2 being perfect play. So in the end, both black and white have made a decisive error, leading to a close end at 34-30.

Reviewing these games has been both fun and enlightening for me, I hope you experienced a bit of both reading it. Maybe it will give you a leading edge when playing a game against me in the future, but don’t count me making the same mistakes again :)